Aer Lingus pax 'disembark' onto wings
 

Granted, there was a return so uncertain what announcements might have occurred prior to landing but pax opened the over wing emergency exits and climbed onto wing after the pilot requested they 'disembark the aircraft quickly'. https://nypost.com/2019/05/09/plane-...gency-landing/

Quite an understandable action. How long now before this thread starts the "taking baggage with them" discussion?

I think you just opened the door:)

Reading the article I saw that an emergency exit was essentially 'blocked' by CC assisting a disabled passenger and preventing disembarking of the other pax (remember - the pax thought it was an emergency evac) so that was why the over wing exits were used.
The needs of the One outweighs the needs of the many?
If that had happened in the terrible Moscow crash fire, how many then would have survived?
Its a supremely difficult humanitarian dilemma.

Except that it wasn't a dilemma for the CC who (presumably) were fully aware it wasn't an evacuation.

Isnt it standard practise for disabled pax to be Last On, Last Off?
If so, why didn't that happen as it WASN'T an Emergency??
Just asking - no hidden agenda.

Expensive affair - not only the cost of repacking the overwing slides (which some pax used), but also the repairs to the E/E doors, which were damaged when ejected onto the wings/ground.

You either have an emergency evacuation or it is a normal disembarkation.
As this Cpt just found out.
A tricky one this one as once You go for a normal one and the stairs are attached the slides are disarmed.
On the A320 the overwing slides apparently are armed regardless.
Bad choice of wording leading to a bit of crowd control issues.
I learned something today.
Regards
Cpt B

Not from my recent experience, at least for boarding. "Passengers needing assistance" are always mentioned first or very early in the boarding call.

First on, but almost always last off on US flights, at least with Delta. I don't think that last off is policy, just simply time it takes to get wheel chairs to the gate with correct staff (e.g. not airline staff). A lot of elderly and wheel chair folks on our flights Tuesday. Also, I believe that even if they are not in a wheel chair, but somewhat elderly, they don't want to get trampled. Lots of elderly frequent fliers these days.

Rapid disembarkation and leave all baggage behind (which is what is alleged to have been the directions) leaves the word disembarkation somewhat fuzzy I think.

Assistance needed = First on - Last off as a standard.

Whatsitallabout:
Interesting procedure.
Perfect decision.
Plan/Sop not so perfect.
Standing by for amendment.
So, I learn more today.
Thanks W

What a pity nobody thought to explain the difference to the passengers in advance! Presumably Aer Lingus are now reviewing this part of SOP as a result of practical experience?

I think there is a wide gap in interpretation possible full evac and normal disembark.

Particularly as the initial CC direction reportedly included the instruction to use the nearest exit, subsequently amended to "please exit the aircraft through the back doors and forward doors" once it was realised that the overwing exits had been opened.

I'm thinking that seeing fire trucks plus having seen recently just how quickly a plane can burn up might well have contributed to the panic.

You did actually read the links, didn't you ?

The incident happened in November 2017 BTW.

As suggested in the other posts, passengers have only been briefed in two kinds of exit procedures: Normal (take your time and your bags) and Emergency (find the nearest exit, and leave everything non human behind). It is not reasonable to expect passengers to distinguish something halfway in between, so in fairness to the pax, particularly those seated in the exit row who have been told to open the overwing exits in case of emergency, one can hardly blame them for assuming the worst once prompted by an ambiguous announcement.

If the airline procedures allow for something in between, that should be properly explained to the pax in advance, and if the overwing exits are not to be used, that should be briefed to the exit row pax as well.

That is an interesting question, why is there a procedure between "Normal" and "Emergency?" If the plane had in fact been filling up with toxic fumes the only question we would now be asking is "why did it take so long to evacuate?" This is an example of normalcy bias in my opinion. The problem is that there are a lot of people and little volume in an aircraft so you don't have the same time to ponder whether you have a real situation as you do with a house or ship. Fortunately these events are quite rare so I would think that a company could easily absorb the costs of non-essential evacuations, and it does provide good practice -- and each event gives the engineers something to ponder when designing new aircraft.

You don't want your last thought to be "it is probably nothing..."

Quite so.

Worth noting, too, that that AAIU investigation report did not see the need to make any Safety Recommendations in relaton to the event.

This may be one of the few occasions on this forum where a non professional's view might help

As an 'interested' passenger and private pilot who has followed airplane and airline progress for over fifty years I can tell you that the functional difference between 'Disembark' and 'Evacuate' had not really occurred to me until reading about this incident. (Of course I know the 'literal' difference.) Younger people who have no interest in airplanes other than how much it cost to 'get there' wouldn't have a clue, and certainly not in the heat of the moment of an apparent emergency.

As three of my kids went through armed forces officer training a few years ago I was struck by how much of that training was about communicating precise instructions. Basically if you have not told someone exactly how not to screw up they will inevitably make the screw up choices.

The question will be how to tell passengers that you want them to disembark quickly and without their possessions without them jumping to the conclusion that it is some kind of emergency.

I was on a SQ B777, on an airbridge stand at SIN. Mid-way through boarding, the Captain announced "please will everyone deplane immediately". Wasnt an evac and the cabin crew rushed pax to the 2 open doors (First and Business) avoiding any closed doors. Obviously SQ had a mid procedure.

Interestingly the Capt then came into the terminal and told us he had a fire warning in the hold, which was why he asked us to leave immediately, but he didn't deem that to be urgent enough to evac. Turned out to be an aerosole but he couldn't have known that. After we reboarded 2 hours later, we taxiied to the runway and returned to stand due to an issue with the flaps, unsurprisingly a couple of pax then decided they wanted to get off the flight!

In event of a forced evacuation I would not be waiting for passengers to embark politely were people deciding coats and bags are needed and what to bring. Clamber, climb, fight my way to get off the plane were a fire situation happening. Don't care if my photo was in media but not interested in playing nice when my survival and potentially my kids are at stake.

QF at the time I flew for them had "precautionary disembarkation"- basically, a need to disembark asap but where the risk of injury using slides is greatwer than the risk of the non normal/non standard event.

this was only ever to be done after a thorough PA to pax, outlining which doors were to be used (nominates by capt after briefing with cc) and whether steps or slides would be used. Usually the phrase was "due to an abnormal situation, as a PRECAUTION we require to disembark all passengers. At this time steps are/are not available (and slides will be used). Doors mentioned and demoed by crew. Leave all bags, proceed calmly, follow all crew instructions etc. CC would use downgraded version of commands in a normal "marshalling people" volume to the tune of "leave cabin baggage, walk quickly, take care on the stairs/sit down and slide"

at any time it could be upgraded to full evac if situation demanded it, by an announcement on the PA "evacuate evacuate evacuate" and corresponding commands by CC. E.g. "leave everything this way jump and slide/run and move away etc etc...

iirc they used this method in SIN with the wounded A380 once established that full evac was not necessary due presence of RFFS

There's always one ar$£sole!

Only if really really lucky, mostly there are many many more.

at my former airline, we called it a "rapid deplaning", via normal exits, leave your stuff behind

Pax just can't win.

If they follow the little picture-diagrams in the safety card, they get criticized.

If they ignore the little picture-diagrams in the safety-card, they get criticized.

https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/...-briefing.html

"Everything not prohibited is compulsory."

Can't see the problem. Instruction was given to use all exits. Instruction was obeyed.